Informal Consultations of the 44th Session of the Commission on
the Status of Women (Beijing +5 PrepCom)New
York, May 2000

BRIEFING
NOTE

FOR 25 MAY 2000

COMMISSION
ON THE STATUS OF WOMEN ACTING AS THE PREPARATORY COMMITTEE FOR BEIJING +5

SUMMARY

On
Thursday, 25 May, Working Group I discussed Section II from 10am to 1pm,
and from 7pm to 10pm. Working Group II discussed Section IV from 3pm to
6pm. The following summary covers only text negotiated in the current
sessions.

WORKING
GROUP I: SECTION II: ACHIEVEMENTS AND OBSTACLES

Economy:In paragraph 15, on obstacles,
delegates agreed that gender discrimination in hiring and promotion and
related to pregnancy including through pregnancy testing, and sexual
harassment in the work place persist. On language stating that, in some
countries, women’s equal rights to ownership of land and other forms of
property and to inheritance is not recognized in national legislation, the
EU specified ownership and control. Delegates agreed. LIBYA, PAKISTAN,
IRAN and ALGERIA opposed “equal.” PAKISTAN underscored outright
rejection of including equal before inheritance. JUSCANZ, SOUTH AFRICA and
CHINA supported retaining equal. IRAN suggested referring to equal access.
CHINA, opposed by SOUTH AFRICA, advocated deleting the reference to in
national legislation, noting non-recognition extends beyond this.
Delegates bracketed the provision and the references to equal access and
national legislation, and noted PFA 165(e) as possible alternative
language. Delegates agreed progression in professions, in most cases, is
still more difficult for women, due to the lack of structures and measures
that take into account maternity and family responsibilities. They also
agreed on language, amended by the HOLY SEE, providing that in some cases,
persistent gender stereotyping has led to a lower status of male workers
as fathers and to an insufficient encouragement for men to reconcile
professional and family responsibilities. Delegates further agreed that
lack of family-friendly policies regarding the organization of work
increases these difficulties and that effective implementation of
legislation and practical support systems is still inadequate.

Human
Rights: In paragraph 20, on
achievements, delegates agreed to language noting reforms of laws
governing marriage and family relations and women’s rights, and added a
reference to laws governing all forms of violence. The EU supported, and
IRAN, ALGERIA and LIBYA opposed, JUSCANZ language stating that in a
growing number of countries, legal measures have been taken to prohibit
discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. The language remains
bracketed. On steps having been taken to realize women’s de facto
enjoyment of their human rights through creation of an enabling
environment including, inter alia, implementation of legal literacy
and awareness campaigns, IRAN, supported by CHINA, ALGERIA and CUBA,
proposed specifying campaigns at the national level. JUSCANZ opposed,
observing that campaigns have occurred at the international level. The
Chair proposed referring to the national and international level. BOTSWANA
preferred a reference to all levels. The Chair’s and Botswana’s
alternatives are bracketed.

Delegates
agreed on text stating that CEDAW has been ratified or acceded to by 165
countries and its full implementation has been promoted by the Committee
on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women. They agreed to delete
a reference to growing public awareness and support for the protection of
all human rights and fundamental freedoms. Regarding text on adoption of
the Optional Protocol of the Convention by the General Assembly, the EU
suggested additional wording on the Optional Protocol allowing women to
submit claims on violations of the rights protected under CEDAW. LIBYA,
supported by ALGERIA, stated that the language should be general. The EU-proposed
addition remains bracketed. Delegates accepted text referring to progress
made in integrating the human rights of women and mainstreaming a gender
perspective into the UN system, but could not agree on a reference to the
Commission on Human Rights, which remains bracketed. Regarding text on the
contribution of women’s NGOs to heightening awareness that women’s
rights are human rights and to generating support for the Optional
Protocol and the statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC),
delegates agreed to a suggestion by PAKISTAN on support “for the
adoption of” the Optional Protocol. CHINA noted that addition of this
language implied adoption of the statute of the ICC. ALGERIA questioned
the relevance of the ICC reference, and asked that the language be
bracketed. ECUADOR, supported by the EU, emphasized the importance of both
the Optional Protocol and the statute of the ICC. The reference remains
bracketed.

In
paragraph 21, on obstacles, the EU, supported by JUSCANZ, proposed
language on gender and all forms of discrimination, in particular related
to racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and intolerance; and
suggested deleting reference to ethnic cleansing, armed conflict and
foreign occupation. The G-77/CHINA preferred to keep the text bracketed.
JUSCANZ agreed to a G-77/China formulation stating that while a number of
countries have ratified CEDAW, the goal of universal ratification by the
year 2000 has not been achieved. Chair Mlacak suggested a compilation of
G-77/China, JUSCANZ, Mexico, and EU proposals on CEDAW implementation,
gaps between existing legal standards and their application, and harmful
traditional and stereotyped attitudes. The new formulation remains
bracketed. The G-77/CHINA proposed, while the EU and JUSCANZ opposed,
replacing EU text on countries enforcing gender discrimination through law
with language on women having insufficient access to the law in many
countries. Both references remain bracketed. Discussion on the last two
sentences on reproductive health and barriers to human rights was
deferred.

Media:In paragraph 22, on achievements,
delegates agreed to the paragraph with JUSCANZ amendments to: refer to
women’s media networks contributing to global information dissemination;
delete text on the development of information and communication
technologies (ICTs) influencing the participation of women in media; and
to add references to the empowerment of women and girls and the increasing
number of women contributing to, inter alia, knowledge sharing.

In
paragraph 23, on obstacles, the EU called for reference to obscene
materials instead of pornography. IRAN wanted to retain pornography, while
the HOLY SEE, with JUSCANZ, proposed language on child pornography and
other obscene materials agreed by the WSSD+5 PrepCom. The reference
remains bracketed. Delegates agreed to Senegal’s proposal, amended by
Ecuador, to refer to negative and/or degrading images of women. In text on
the increase in some instances of, inter alia, negative images,
they also accepted IRAN’s insertion of language on different forms using
new technologies. JUSCANZ proposed reference to areas of journalism
remaining biased against women, instead of journalists. MEXICO, supported
by CUBA, ARGENTINA, VENEZUELA, ALGERIA, BRAZIL and LIBYA, preferred media
professionals. The EU proposed some media professionals, while the Chair
suggested text on bias against women remaining in the media. The
alternatives remain bracketed. Delegates agreed to a JUSCANZ proposal to
delete a sentence on male norms. VENEZUELA, CUBA, ALGERIA and ARGENTINA
supported a Holy See proposal to refer to a list of issues, including
poverty and illiteracy, limiting access to the Internet. JUSCANZ added a
reference to lack of computer literacy, and called for deleting a
reference to language barriers. The HOLY SEE and VENEZUELA, on behalf of
Some Latin American Countries (SLAC), accepted lack of computer literacy.
CHINA and SOUTH AFRICA wanted to retain language barriers. SENEGAL
supported the Holy See proposal, but stressed the barriers apply equally
to men. The EU agreed. CUBA and SOUTH AFRICA noted that these obstacles
affect women more, and called for retaining placement. The list remains
bracketed. Delegates agreed to Mexico’s proposal to refer to these
barriers preventing some women from using ICTs, in particular the
Internet. The US amended the text to refer to including the Internet. In
the paragraph’s last sentence, SLAC noted difficulties with references
to political will and financial resources, and urged deletion. LIBYA,
ALGERIA, CUBA, CHINA, the PHILIPPINES and IRAN agreed. The EU said it
would not accept the sentence without political will. JUSCANZ proposed
language specifying that development of and access to Internet
infrastructure is limited. The Chair proposed including a reference from
Cuba on developing countries and particularly for women. Delegates agreed
to this formulation.

Environment

: In paragraph 24, achievements,
delegates agreed to text stating that some national environmental policies
and programmes have incorporated gender perspectives. Regarding the link
between poverty and environmental degradation, delegates could not agree
to language proposed by Mexico on overcoming poverty as a pre-condition to
advancing toward sustainable development and reversing the tendency of
environmental degradation. The EU pointed out that there is also
environmental degradation in industrialized countries. Delegates could not
reach consensus on a JUSCANZ-proposed reference to health. The paragraph
remains bracketed.

WORKING
GROUP II: SECTION IV: FURTHER ACTIONS AND INITIATIVE

Actions
to be taken at the international level: In
120(e), on establishment of a database listing all programmes and projects
carried out by UN agencies, delegates could not reach consensus on a
suggestion by Chair Bhattacharjee to use JUSCANZ-proposed text calling for
ECOSOC to ï¿½build upï¿½ a database. The text remains bracketed.

In
121(f), on development planning, delegates accepted wording on gender
perspective as a ï¿½keyï¿½ dimension of development. The sub-paragraph was
agreed.

In
121(g), on CEDAW implementation, SLAC suggested deleting a reference to
concluding comments and general recommendations of the CEDAW Committee.
JUSCANZ pointed out that the language was imported from a GA resolution.
Various delegations proposed formulations to ensure the meaning of the
resolution was maintained in the sub-paragraph. PAKISTAN suggested that
the text be placed elsewhere, and it remains bracketed.

In
122(a), development of gender-sensitive responses to humanitarian crises,
SLAC suggested text on assisting governments, upon request, to develop
these responses. PAKISTAN questioned the inclusion of reference to
environmental degradation, suggested a merger with sub-paragraph 122 (b),
and, with CUBA, supported reference to humanitarian ï¿½emergencies.ï¿½ The
EU referred to PFA language on environmental degradation. IRAN proposed
deletion of reference to natural disasters and environmental degradation.
Citing national experiences, ST. KITTS AND NEVIS and ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA
highlighted the importance of reference to natural disasters. ALGERIA
questioned whether national or international guidelines on responses were
considered intergovernmentally. The sub-paragraph remains bracketed.

In
122(a) bis, on a G-77/CHINA proposal inviting the UNCHR to enhance
further assistance to refugees, GUINEA suggested using agreed language
from CHR resolution L.74. JUSCANZ preferred to retain a gender-specific
focus in the sub-paragraph, which remains bracketed.

In
122(b), on participation by women at all levels of decision-making in
development activities and peace processes, SLAC amended text proposed by
JUSCANZ, adding reference to promoting the participation of women. The
HOLY SEE withdrew their proposal to delete the sub-paragraph. The EU
proposed reference to all stages of design, planning and implementation.
PAKISTAN added reference to supporting and ensuring full and equal
participation. LIBYA suggested distinguishing language on development in
all its aspects and stages from peace-keeping activities, and BANGLADESH
proposed, with support from SLAC, CHINA, SENEGAL, ALGERIA, the EU, and
SOUTH AFRICA, splitting the sub-paragraph into one on development and one
on peace-keeping. BANGLADESH also proposed, while SLAC opposed and SOUTH
AFRICA supported, adding reference to all levels of implementation. The
sub-paragraph was divided, but all text remains bracketed.

In
122(c), an EU formulation on considering funding and support for
empowering women and their organizations in conflict prevention,
peace-keeping, and post-conflict transformation activities, SLAC proposed,
while the EU opposed and CUBA supported, either deleting the sub-paragraph
or merging it with 122 (b). PAKISTAN, with LIBYA and CUBA, proposed
deleting reference to funding. JUSCANZ preferred text on strengthening
capacity for involvement in conflict prevention. The EU agreed to consider
a suggestion made by PAKISTAN and supported by LIBYA to replace reference
to transformation with reference to reconstruction. The text remains
bracketed.

-----------------------------------------------

This
briefing note was provided by the International Institute for Sustainable
Development, publishers of the Earth Negotiations Bulletin ï¿½ enb@iisd.org.
It was written and edited by Tonya Barnes <tmb34@columbia.edu>,
Richard Campbell <richard@iisd.org>,
Wendy Jackson <wendy@iisd.org>,
and
Gretchen Sidhu <gsidhu@igc.org>. The Editor is Pamela
Chasek, Ph.D.
<pam@iisd.org> and the Managing Editor is Langston James "Kimo"
Goree <kimo@iisd.org>. IISD can be contacted by e-mail at <info@iisd.ca>
and at 161 Portage Avenue East, 6th Floor, Winnipeg, Manitoba R3B 0Y4,
Canada. The opinions expressed in this briefing note are those of the
authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of IISD and other funders.
Excerpts from this briefing note may be used in non-commercial
publications only and only with appropriate academic citation. For
permission to use this material in commercial publications, contact the
Managing Editor.